I think I already know the answer to this. My friend plays guitar, I play violin. My friend is a terrible singer, but good guitar player. I'm an above average singer, but it's difficult to play and sing at the same time. I already play melody on the violin, so I didn't think it would be an issue. Would it be too boring to listen to a 3:30 song with no words? Would I lose people? How can I compromise between my instrument and singing? We're already short-handed as it is! Help!
2007-01-09 11:28:31 · 17 answers · asked by wst 1 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Music
I think if none of your songs had words, then yes, you would lose people, unless your songs were really good. however, you could have some songs with just guitar accompaniment and you singing, along with some instrumentals, or you could find another person to join you to sing while you're playing violin.
2007-01-09 11:34:26 · answer #1 · answered by squoosh22 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
How many people are in your group? You might consider a 'singer' just for certain songs that might be long and need that special "umph" in it to bring some variation with your audience. Or, since you are above average in your singing - play a bit and then let the other person play while you do some singing, and vaccilate between the two. I play keyboards and sing and when I first started it was VERY DIFFICULT to do both. My problem was wanting to get up from the piano and really belt out the song and forget the piano. After practicing a long time and getting the feel of it, it became natural. The only drawback I suffer now is - I have to have my lyrics in front of me. lol But, in performing, I have another person pick up the keyboard part when I want to get up and really blow the song away. I don't know what kind of music you sing, but I know jazz folks get away with 'no singing' all the time. You might also consider a small group to back up singing some chorus parts. Just depends on how much you perform and can afford additional singers. I'd love to hear you! Guitar and violin is quite a combination.
2007-01-09 11:38:24 · answer #2 · answered by THE SINGER 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Jazz and blues musicians have been making music for over a century that is instrumental, so the answer to your question is a definite no.
Instrumental music needs to be interesting, and if you don't have a vocalist, one of the instruments needs to be playing the melody line. Since the violin is not a chordal instrument, then that would be the natural inclincation.
But - have you considered bringing on extra people. Find a singer and a percussion player and a bass player and you have a kickin' band.
FP
2007-01-09 11:38:49 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why are they in call for? because of the fact Disney commencing having lots of singers like Jonas Brothers, and Nickelodeon stated o crap now we've some greater opposition, and directly have been given a band. A poor band at that. I advise come on, the Jonas Brothers have songs that make sense, however the bare Brothers Band sing approximately,"positioned a banana in a blender and shake all of it up." Or something like that. What i'm asserting is that bare Brothers band stinks!!
2016-10-06 22:08:01 · answer #4 · answered by kuhlmann 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You could have a song or two...if the instrumental was good enough to fill the void that would usually be vocals.
Orchestras are so rich in instrumental sound that they do not need vocals to "fill space" or add anything else, a 2 or 3 piece band would have to be rather talented to pull this off...
2007-01-09 11:33:23 · answer #5 · answered by Sgt. Pepper 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Don't give in to what other people expect or want of you. Music is a self-expressive art; not a form of entertainment to pander to the expectations of the audience. Most people said Sonic Youth would suck using anything but traditional tunings, but lo and behold thay are one of the greatest bands of all time. Many bands have made excellent music with little or no singing or even song structure, Godspeed You Black Emperor!, Amon Duul, even Dick Dale. It's safe to say that if you play worthwhile music, regardless of weather you have vocals in the mix or not, your audience will find you, and even if they don't, your reward will be the road to trying something new. I think John Peel said it best in regard to rock experimentalism "I just want to hear something I haven't heard before"-do something original! Best of luck.
2007-01-09 11:38:46 · answer #6 · answered by strokesfanatic 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No! No suck!
So much music without singing is really good!
So much singing is really bad!
If you're both good at your instruments and you make creative compelling music without a singer... don't feel the need to go out and get a singer!
2007-01-09 11:34:20 · answer #7 · answered by meandlisa 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
B.B. King never sang and played at the same time. Check out violin/singer Andrew Bird on Youtube and see how he does his thing.
2007-01-09 14:51:08 · answer #8 · answered by Chaine de lumière 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well i would hold auditions for a singer. There is no way i would listen to a song with no vocals, its boring. When holding auditions get the whole band together and vote for your fav. Thats's what we did with our REALLY HOT drummer:) hes so cute. Anyways it works, hope it helped
2007-01-09 11:32:56 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
either learn to sing and play the guitar, or learn to play REALLY good instrumentals. trans-siberian orchestra makes really good instrumental music (they dont play classical, they play modern rock) even though in a few of their songs have vocals most of them are instrumental.
2007-01-09 11:38:26 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋